Ar 11:10 -0800 1998-11-20, scríobh Kenneth Whistler:
>Markus Kuhn pulled up from somewhere:
>
>> 20AF DRACHMA SIGN (not yet under ballot)
>
>Not only is this character not yet under ballot,
>it has not yet been formally *considered* either by
>WG2 or the UTC.
>
>The reason why Michael Everson (?)

Yes of course it was me.

>has jumped the gun on
>this one is that there is a reasonable presumption that
>the DRACHMA SIGN *will* be added at the last minute by WG2
>for the republication of 10646, based on the fact that it
>is being added to the revised ISO 8859-7.

Yes, and there is explicit explanation of this in Markus' source document
(the final draft of the CEN Workshop Agreement for Multilingual European
Subsets of the UCS, explaining exactly what the situation is and referring
specifically to London and Fukuoka and WG2.

>But no one knows for sure what will happen on this one --
>it is premature to be including it in any implementation
>lists until after the next WG2 meeting, in March, 1999
>in Fukuoka, Japan, when this currency sign will presumably
>be considered.

True, and the CWA document states very specifically that the character will
not be part of the CWA if it is not put into the FPDAM at Fukuoka. The
reasons this was put into the CWA is because of time dependencies on the
ballots, etc. The CWA is an agreement in principle about what should be in
the MESs. Obviously if something is not _in_ the UCS it cannot be in a
subset of the UCS. The CWA document states that for characters under ballot
(plus this one) whatever the state of them by the time DAM 30 is approved
is the true CWA.

So it was jumping the gun pretty openly and advisedly, with regard to the
Final Draft of the CWA. I think Markus would be jumping it even more if he
released software that supported it before DAM 30 is approved, however.